19424 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, Environmental 

protection, National parks, Wilderness 

areas. 

Dated: April 6, 2007. 

Walter W. Kovalick, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. E7–7347 Filed 4–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0459; FRL–8301–9] 

Determination of Attainment, Approval 

and Promulgation of Implementation 

Plans and Designation of Areas for Air 

Quality Planning Purposes; Indiana; 

Redesignation of the LaPorte County 

8-Hour Nonattainment Area to 

Attainment for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On May 30, 2006, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

request for EPA approval of a 

redesignation of LaPorte County to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

and of an ozone maintenance plan for 

LaPorte County as a revision to the 

Indiana State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). EPA is proposing to approve 

Indiana’s request and maintenance plan 

SIP revision. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides 

(NOX) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

(MVEBs) for LaPorte County, as 

supported by the ozone maintenance 

plan for this County, for purposes of 

conformity determinations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 18, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–

OAR–2006–0459, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

• Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

operation are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–

0459. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI, or otherwise 

protected, through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov 

website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’

system, which means EPA will not 

know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send an 

e-mail comment directly to EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your e-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD-ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters and any 

form of encryption, and should be free 

of any defects or viruses 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hardcopy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hardcopy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. It is 

recommended that you telephone 

Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, 

at (312) 886–6057, before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6057, 

doty.edward@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. This supplementary 

information section is arranged as 

follows: 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take? 

II. What Is the Background for This Action? 

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation 

to Attainment? 

IV. What Are EPA’s Analyses of the State’s 

Requests and What Are the Bases for 

EPA’s Proposed Action? 

V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the End of 

the 10-Year Maintenance Plan Which 

Can Be Used To Support Conformity 

Determinations? 

VI. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed 

Action? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To 

Take? 

We are proposing to take several 

related actions for LaPorte County. First, 

we are proposing to determine that 

LaPorte County has attained the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS based on air quality for 

the period of 2003 through 2005. 

Second, we are proposing to approve 

Indiana’s ozone maintenance plan for 

LaPorte County as a requested revision 

to the Indiana SIP. The maintenance 

plan is designed to keep LaPorte County 

in attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

standard for the next 14 years, through 

2020. As supported by and consistent 

with the ozone maintenance plan, we 

are also proposing to approve the 2020 

VOC and NOX MVEBs for LaPorte 

County for conformity purposes. 

Finally, we are proposing to approve the 

request from the State of Indiana to 

change the designation of LaPorte 

County from nonattainment to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

We have determined that the State and 

LaPorte County have met the 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19425 

1This standard is violated in an area when any 

ozone monitor in the area (or in its impacted 

downwind environs) records 8-hour ozone 

concentrations with an average of the annual 

fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone 

concentrations over a three-year period equaling or 

exceeding 85 ppb. See 40 CFR 50.10. 

2The 8-hour ozone design value and the 1-hour 

ozone design value for each area were not 

necessarily recorded at the same monitoring site. 

The worst-case monitoring site for each ozone 

concentration averaging time was considered for 

each area. 

requirements for redesignation to 

attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

II. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

A. General Background Information 

EPA has determined that ground-level 

ozone is detrimental to human health. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated an 

8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 parts per 

million parts of air (0.08 ppm) (80 parts 

per billion (ppb)) (62 FR 38856).1 This 

8-hour ozone standard replaced a prior 

1-hour ozone NAAQS, which had been 

promulgated on February 8, 1979 (44 FR 

8202), and which EPA revoked on June 

15, 2005 (69 FR 23858). 

Ground-level ozone is not emitted 

directly by sources. Rather, emitted NOX

and VOC react in the presence of 

sunlight to form ground-level ozone 

along with other secondary compounds. 

NOX and VOC are referred to as ‘‘ozone 

precursors.’’ Control of ground-level 

ozone concentrations is achieved 

through controlling VOC and NOX

emissions. 

Section 107 of the CAA required EPA 

to designate as nonattainment any area 

that violates the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

The Federal Register notice 

promulgating the 8-hour ozone 

designations and classifications was 

published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23857). 

The CAA contains two sets of 

provisions—subpart 1 and subpart 2—

that address planning and emission 

control requirements for nonattainment 

areas. Both are found in title I, part D 

of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains general, 

less prescriptive requirements for all 

nonattainment areas for any pollutant 

governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 

contains more specific requirements for 

certain ozone nonattainment areas, and 

applies to ozone nonattainment areas 

classified under section 181 of the CAA. 

In the April 30, 2004 designation 

rulemaking, EPA divided 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas into the categories 

of subpart 1 nonattainment (‘‘basic’’

nonattainment) and subpart 2 

nonattainment (‘‘classified’’

nonattainment). EPA based this division 

on the areas 8-hour ozone design values 

(i.e., on the three-year averages of the 

annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8- 

hour ozone concentrations at the worstcase monitoring sites in the areas) and 

on their 1-hour ozone design values 

(i.e., on the fourth-highest daily 

maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations 

over the three-year period at the worstcase monitoring sites in the areas).2 EPA 

classified 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

areas with 1-hour ozone design values 

equaling or exceeding 121 ppb as 

subpart 2, classified nonattainment 

areas. EPA classified all other 8-hour 

nonattainment areas as subpart 1, basic 

nonattainment areas. The basis for area 

classification was defined in a separate 

April 30, 2004, final rule (the Phase 1 

implementation rule) (69 FR 23951). 

Emission control requirements for 

classified nonattainment areas are 

linked to area classifications. Areas with 

more serious ozone pollution problems 

are subject to more prescribed 

requirements and later attainment dates. 

The prescribed emission control 

requirements are designed to bring areas 

into attainment by their specified 

attainment dates. 

In the April 30, 2004, ozone 

designation/classification rulemaking, 

EPA designated LaPorte County as a 

subpart 2 moderate nonattainment area 

for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This 

designation was based on ozone data 

collected during the 2001–2003 period. 

On September 22, 2004 (69 FR 56697), 

EPA revised the designation of LaPorte 

County to subpart 2 marginal 

nonattainment. 

On May 30, 2006, the State of Indiana 

requested redesignation of LaPorte 

County to attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS based on ozone data 

collected in LaPorte County during the 

2003–2005 period. On August 24, 2006, 

IDEM submitted a summary of an ozone 

data review and supplementary ozone 

data to address a shortfall in the data 

supporting the ozone redesignation 

request. 

B. What Is the Impact of the December 

22, 2006 United States Court of Appeals 

Decision Regarding EPA’s Phase 1 

Implementation Rule? 

On December 22, 2006, the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit (the Court) vacated 

EPA’s Phase 1 implementation rule 

(Phase 1 Rule) for the 8-hour ozone 

standard (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). 

South Coast Air Quality Management 

Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 

2006). The Court held that certain 

provisions of EPA’s Phase 1 Rule were 

inconsistent with the requirements of 

the CAA. The Court rejected EPA’s 

reasons for implementing the 8-hour 

ozone standard in nonattainment areas 

under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2 of 

Title I, part D of the CAA. The Court 

also held that EPA improperly failed to 

retain four measures required for 1-hour 

ozone nonattainment areas under the 

anti-backsliding provisions of the 

regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New 

Source Review (NSR) requirements 

based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment 

classification; (2) section 185 penalty 

fees for 1-hour severe or extreme ozone 

nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be 

implemented pursuant to section 

172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the 

contingency of an area not making 

reasonable further progress toward 

attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 

or failing to attain that NAAQS; and, (4) 

conformity requirements for certain 

types of Federal actions. The Court 

upheld EPA’s authority to revoke the 1- 

hour ozone standard provided that there 

were adequate anti-backsliding 

provisions. 

This section sets forth EPA’s views on 

the potential effect of the Court’s ruling 

on this redesignation action. For the 

reasons set forth below, EPA does not 

believe that the Court’s ruling alters any 

requirements relevant to this 

redesignation action so as to preclude 

redesignation, and does not prevent 

EPA from finalizing this redesignation. 

EPA believes that the Court’s decision, 

as it currently stands or as it may be 

modified based on any petition for 

rehearing that has been filed, imposes 

no impediment to moving forward with 

redesignation of this area to attainment, 

because in either circumstance 

redesignation is appropriate under the 

relevant redesignation provisions of the 

CAA and longstanding policies 

regarding redesignation requests. 

With respect to the 8-hour ozone 

standard, LaPorte County is classified as 

moderate nonattainment under subpart 

2 of the CAA. We do not believe that 

any part of the Court’s opinion would 

require that this subpart 2 classification 

be changed upon remand to EPA. 

However, even assuming for present 

purposes that LaPorte County would 

become subject to a different 

classification under a classification 

scheme created in a future rule in 

response to the Court’s decision, this 

would not prevent EPA from finalizing 

a redesignation for this area. For the 

reasons set forth below, we believe that 

any additional requirements that might 

apply based on that different 

classification would not be applicable 

for purposes of evaluating the 

redesignation request. 

This belief is based on: (1) EPA’s 

longstanding policy of evaluating 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19426 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

3The worst-case monitoring site-specific ozone 

design value in the area or in its affected downwind 

environs. 

redesignation requests in accordance 

with only the requirements due at the 

time the complete redesignation request 

was submitted; and, (2) consideration of 

the inequity of retroactively applying 

any requirements that might be applied 

in the future. 

First, at the time the complete 

redesignation request was submitted 

(May 30, 2006), LaPorte County was 

classified under subpart 2 and was 

required to meet the subpart 2 

requirements. Under EPA’s 

longstanding interpretation of section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, to qualify for 

redesignation, states requesting 

redesignation to attainment must meet 

only the relevant SIP requirements that 

came due prior to the submittal of 

complete redesignation requests. 

September 4, 1992 Calcagni 

memorandum (‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Director, Air 

Quality Management Division). See also: 

September 17, 1993 Shapiro 

memorandum (‘‘State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas 

Submitting Requests for Redesignation 

to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) on or after 

November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting 

Assistant Administrator, Air and 

Radiation Division); 60 FR 12459, 

12465–12466 (March 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor); 

Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th 

Cir. 2004), which upheld this 

interpretation; and, 68 FR 25418, 25424, 

25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of 

St. Louis). At the time the redesignation 

request for LaPorte County was 

submitted, the area was not classified 

under subpart 1 and no subpart 1 

requirements were applicable for 

purposes of redesignation. 

Second, it would be inequitable to 

retroactively apply any new SIP 

requirements that were not applicable at 

the time the complete redesignation 

request was submitted, but which might 

later become applicable. The D.C. 

Circuit has recognized the inequity of 

such retroactive rulemaking. See Sierra 

Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 

2002), in which the D.C. Circuit upheld 

a District Court’s ruling refusing to make 

retroactive an EPA determination of 

nonattainment that was past the 

statutory attainment deadline. Such a 

determination would have resulted in 

the imposition of additional 

requirements on the area. The Court 

stated: ‘‘Although EPA failed to make 

the nonattainment determination within 

the statutory time frame, Sierra Club’s 

proposed solution only makes the 

situation worse. Retroactive relief would 

likely impose large costs on the States, 

which would face fines and suits for not 

implementing air pollution plans in 

1997, even though they were not on 

notice at the time.’’ Id. at 68. Similarly, 

here it would be unfair to penalize the 

area by applying to it for purposes of 

redesignation additional requirements 

under subpart 1 that were not in effect 

at the time Indiana submitted its 

redesignation request, but that might 

apply in the future. 

Because LaPorte County was 

designated as Unclassifiable/Attainment 

under the 1-hour ozone standard and 

was never designated nonattainment for 

the 1-hour ozone standard, there are no 

outstanding 1-hour nonattainment area 

requirements that LaPorte County 

would be required to meet. Thus, we 

find that the Court’s ruling does not 

result in any additional 1-hour 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation of LaPorte County. 

III. What Are the Criteria for 

Redesignation to Attainment? 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA authorizes 

redesignation provided that: (1) The 

Administrator determines that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) 

the Administrator has fully approved an 

applicable state implementation plan for 

the area under section 110(k) of the 

CAA; (3) the Administrator determines 

that the improvement in air quality is 

due to permanent and enforceable 

emission reductions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable SIP, 

Federal air pollution control 

regulations, and other permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions; (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area meeting 

the requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA; and, (5) the state containing the 

area has met all requirements applicable 

to the area under section 110 and part 

D of the CAA. 

EPA provided guidance on 

redesignations in the General Preamble 

for the Implementation of Title I of the 

CAA Amendments of 1990 on April 16, 

1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented 

this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 

18070). The two main policy guidelines 

affecting the review of ozone 

redesignation requests are the following: 

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, September 4, 1992 (September 

4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum); and, 

‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, May 10, 1995. For 

additional policy guidelines used in the 

review of ozone redesignation requests, 

see our proposed rule for the 

redesignation of the Evansville, Indiana 

ozone nonattainment area at 70 FR 

53606 (September 9, 2005). 

IV. What Are EPA’s Analyses of the 

State’s Requests and What Are the 

Bases for EPA’s Proposed Action? 

EPA is proposing to: (1) Determine 

that LaPorte County has attained the 8- 

hour ozone standard; (2) approve the 

ozone maintenance plan for this County 

and the VOC and NOX MVEBs 

supported by this maintenance plan; 

and, (3) approve the redesignation of 

this County to attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. The bases for our 

proposed determination and approvals 

follow. 

1. LaPorte County Has Attained the 8- 

Hour Ozone NAAQS 

For ozone, an area may be considered 

to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

if there are no violations of the NAAQS, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR 50.10 and appendix I, based on the 

most recent three complete, consecutive 

calendar years of quality-assured air 

quality monitoring data at all ozone 

monitoring sites in the area and in its 

nearby downwind environs. To attain 

this standard, the average of the annual 

fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour 

average ozone concentrations measured 

and recorded at each monitor (the 

monitoring site’s ozone design value) 

within the area and in its nearby 

downwind environs over the three-year 

period must not exceed the ozone 

standard. Based on an ozone data 

rounding convention described in 40 

CFR part 50, appendix I, the 8-hour 

standard is attained if the area’s ozone 

design value 3 is 0.084 ppm (84 ppb) or 

lower. The data must be collected and 

quality-assured in accordance with 40 

CFR part 58, and must be recorded in 

EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS). The 

ozone monitors generally should have 

remained at the same locations for the 

duration of the monitoring period 

required to demonstrate attainment (for 

three years or more). The data 

supporting attainment of the standard 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19427 

must be complete in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50, appendix I. 

As part of the May 30, 2006 ozone 

redesignation request, IDEM submitted 

ozone monitoring data indicating the 

highest four daily maximum 8-hour 

ozone concentrations for each 

monitoring site in LaPorte County (the 

Michigan City and LaPorte ozone 

monitoring sites) for each year during 

the 2003–2005 period. These worst-case 

ozone concentrations are part of the 

quality-assured ozone data that have 

been entered into EPA’s AQS. The 

annual fourth-high 8-hour daily 

maximum ozone concentrations, along 

with their three-year averages are 

summarized in Table 1. 

TABLE 1.—FOURTH-HIGH 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS

[In parts per billion (ppb)] 

County Monitoring site 2003 2004 2005 Average 

LaPorte ................................................................. Michigan City ........................................................ 82 70 84 79 

LaPorte ................................................................. LaPorte ................................................................. 84 68 89 80 

These data show that the average 

fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour 

ozone concentrations for the monitoring 

sites in LaPorte County are all below the 

85 ppb ozone standard violation cut-off. 

The data support the conclusion that 

LaPorte County did not experience a 

monitored violation of the 8-hour ozone 

standard during the 2003–2005 period. 

We also note that the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS continued to be attained in 

LaPorte County through 2006. Data in 

the AQS show that, in 2006, the 

Michigan City monitor recorded a daily 

maximum fourth-high 8-hour ozone 

concentration of 75 ppb, and the 

LaPorte monitor recorded a daily 

maximum fourth-high 8-hour ozone 

concentration of 69 ppb. 

The State has committed to continue 

ozone monitoring in this area during the 

maintenance period, through 2020. 

IDEM also commits to consult with the 

EPA prior to making any changes in the 

existing monitoring network. 

During our review of the LaPorte 

ozone monitoring data contained in 

EPA’s AQS, we noted that the annual 

percentages of reported daily maximum 

8-hour ozone concentrations for the 

LaPorte monitoring site during the 

2003–2005 ozone seasons (April 

through September in Indiana) were the 

following: 90 percent in 2003; 65 

percent in 2004; and 74 percent in 2005. 

This is not consistent with the threeyear 90 percent annual average 

completeness requirement and the 75 

percent annual minimum completeness 

requirement of 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix I. It should be noted, however, 

that appendix I provides for the 

consideration of surrounding ozone 

monitoring data to support alternative 

conclusions regarding data 

completeness. More specifically, it 

provides that, when computing whether 

the minimum data completeness 

requirements have been met, 

meteorological and ambient data may be 

sufficient to demonstrate that 

meteorological conditions on missing 

data days were not conducive to peak 

ozone concentrations above the level of 

the standard. Missing days assumed to 

have peak ozone concentrations less 

than the standard are counted for 

purposes of meeting the data 

completeness requirements as having 

valid maximum 8-hour ozone 

concentrations. 

On August 24, 2006, IDEM submitted 

supplemental data and documentation 

to support the conclusion that all days 

in 2003, 2004, and 2005 with missing 

ozone data were days in which the 

ozone standard was likely to not have 

been exceeded at the LaPorte site. We 

believe that IDEM’s analysis supports an 

assumption of data completeness for the 

LaPorte monitoring site and, therefore, 

agree that the LaPorte ozone data for 

2003–2005 meet the data completeness 

requirements. IDEM has appropriately 

flagged the ozone data in the AQS for 

this monitoring site supporting this 

conclusion. 

The data submitted by the State 

demonstrate that LaPorte County has 

attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Therefore, we propose to find that 

LaPorte County has attained the 8-hour 

ozone standard. 

2. LaPorte County Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of the CAA and the Area 

Has a Fully Approved SIP Under 

Section 110(k) of the CAA 

EPA has determined that Indiana has 

met all currently applicable SIP 

requirements for LaPorte County under 

section 110 of the CAA (general SIP 

requirements). EPA has also determined 

that the Indiana SIP meets currently 

applicable SIP requirements under part 

D of title I of the CAA (requirements 

specific to basic and subpart 2 ozone 

nonattainment areas). See section 

107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA. In addition, 

EPA has determined that the Indiana 

SIP is fully approved with respect to all 

applicable requirements. See section 

107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA. In making 

these determinations, EPA ascertained 

what requirements are applicable to the 

area, and determined that the applicable 

portions of the SIP meeting these 

requirements are fully approved under 

section 110(k) of the CAA. We note that 

SIPs must be fully approved only with 

respect to currently applicable 

requirements of the CAA, those CAA 

requirements applicable to LaPorte 

County at the time the State submitted 

the final, complete ozone redesignation 

request for this area. 

a. LaPorte County Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of the CAA 

The September 4, 1992 Calcagni 

memorandum describes EPA’s 

interpretation of section 107(D)(3)(E) of 

the CAA. Under this interpretation, to 

qualify for redesignation of an area to 

attainment, the State and the area must 

meet the relevant CAA requirements 

that come due prior to the State’s 

submittal of a complete redesignation 

request for the area. See also a 

September 17, 1993 memorandum from 

Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Radiation, 

‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After 

November 15, 1992’’ and 66 FR 12459, 

12465–12466 (March 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, 

Michigan to attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS). Applicable 

requirements of the CAA that come due 

subsequent to the State’s submittal of a 

complete redesignation request remain 

applicable until a redesignation to 

attainment of the standard is approved, 

but are not required as a prerequisite to 

redesignation. See section 175A(c) of 

the CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 

537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 

25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 

(redesignation of the St. Louis/East St. 

Louis area to attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS). 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19428 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

General SIP requirements: Section 

110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the 

general requirements for a SIP, which 

include: enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques; provisions for the 

establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices necessary to collect 

data on ambient air quality; and 

programs to enforce the emission 

limitations. SIP elements and 

requirements are specified in section 

110(a)(2) of title I, part A of the CAA. 

These requirements and SIP elements 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: (a) Submittal of a SIP that has 

been adopted by the State after 

reasonable public notice and a hearing; 

(b) provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

(c) implementation of a source permit 

program; (d) provisions for the 

implementation of new source part C 

requirements (Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD)) and new source 

part D requirements (New Source 

Review (NSR)); (e) criteria for stationary 

source emission control measures, 

monitoring, and reporting; (f) provisions 

for air quality modeling; and, (g) 

provisions for public and local agency 

participation. 

SIP requirements and elements are 

discussed in the following EPA 

documents: ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, September 4, 

1992; ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean 

Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, October 28, 1992; and ‘‘State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or After 

November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting 

Assistant Administrator, September 17, 

1993. See also other guidance 

documents listed above. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA 

requires SIPs to contain certain 

measures to prevent sources in one state 

from significantly contributing to air 

quality problems in another state. To 

implement this provision, EPA required 

states to establish programs to address 

transport of air pollutants (NOX SIP call, 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)). EPA 

has also found, generally, that states 

have not submitted SIPs under section 

110(a)(1) of the CAA to meet the 

interstate transport requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA (70 FR 

21147, April 25, 2005). However, the 

section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a 

state are not linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s classification. EPA 

believes that the requirements linked 

with a particular nonattainment area’s 

classification are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. The transport SIP submittal 

requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of 

the designation of any one particular 

area in the state. 

We believe that these requirements 

should not be construed to be applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. Further, we believe that 

the other section 110 elements 

described above that are not connected 

with nonattainment plan submissions 

and that are not linked with an area’s 

attainment status are also not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. A state remains subject to 

these requirements after an area is 

redesignated to attainment. We 

conclude that only the section 110 and 

part D requirements which are linked 

with an area’s designation and 

classification are the relevant measures 

in evaluating this aspect of a 

redesignation request. This approach is 

consistent with EPA’s existing policy on 

applicability of conformity and 

oxygenated fuels requirements for 

redesignation purposes, as well as with 

section 184 ozone transport 

requirements. See: Reading, 

Pennsylvania proposed and final 

rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176, 

October 10, 1996 and 62 FR 24826, May 

7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio 

final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 

1996); and Tampa, Florida final 

rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 

1995). See also the discussion on this 

issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio ozone 

redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 

2000), and the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

ozone redesignation (66 FR 50399, 

October 19, 2001). In addition, Indiana’s 

response to the CAIR rule was due in 

September 2006. Because this deadline 

had not yet passed when the State 

submitted the final, complete 

redesignation request, the State’s CAIR 

submittal is also not an applicable 

requirement for redesignation purposes. 

We believe that section 110 elements 

not linked to the area’s nonattainment 

status are not applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. Nonetheless, we also note 

that EPA has previously approved 

provisions in the Indiana SIP addressing 

section 110 elements under the 1-hour 

ozone standard. We have analyzed the 

Indiana SIP as codified in 40 CFR 52, 

subpart P, and have determined that it 

is consistent with the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. The SIP, 

which has been adopted after reasonable 

public notice and hearing, contains 

enforceable emission limitations; 

requires monitoring, compiling, and 

analyzing ambient air quality data; 

requires preconstruction review of new 

major stationary sources and major 

modifications of existing sources; 

provides for adequate funding, staff, and 

associated resources necessary to 

implement its requirements; and, 

requires stationary source emissions 

monitoring and reporting, and otherwise 

satisfies the applicable requirements of 

section 110(a)(2). 

Part D SIP requirements: EPA has 

determined that the Indiana SIP meets 

applicable SIP requirements under part 

D of the CAA. Under part D, an area’s 

classification (marginal, moderate, 

serious, severe, and extreme) indicates 

the requirements to which it will be 

subject. Subpart 1 of part D, found in 

sections 172–176 of the CAA, sets forth 

the basic nonattainment area plan 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part 

D, found in section 182 of the CAA, 

establishes additional specific 

requirements depending on the area’s 

nonattainment classification. 

Part D, subpart 1 requirements: For 

purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation request, the applicable 

subpart 1 part D requirements for all 

nonattainment areas are contained in 

sections 172(c)(1)–(9) and 176. A 

thorough discussion of the requirements 

of section 172 can be found in the 

General Preamble for Implementation of 

Title I (57 FR 13498). (See also 68 FR 

4852–4853 in a St. Louis ozone 

redesignation notice of proposed 

rulemaking for a discussion of section 

172 requirements.) 

As noted in a previous section of this 

proposed rule, no requirements under 

part D of the CAA came due for LaPorte 

County prior to the State’s May 30, 2006 

submittal of a complete redesignation 

request. For example, the requirement 

for an ozone attainment demonstration, 

as contained in section 172(c)(1), was 

not yet applicable, nor were the 

requirements for Reasonably Available 

Control Measures (RACM) and 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) (section 172(c)(1)), 

Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) 

(section 172(c)(2)), and attainment plan 

and RFP contingency measures (section 

172(c)(9)). All of these SIP elements 

were required for submittal after May 

30, 2006. Therefore, none of the part D 

requirements are applicable to LaPorte 

County for purposes of redesignation. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19429 

Section 176 conformity requirements: 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

states to establish criteria and 

procedures to ensure that federallysupported or funded activities, 

including highway projects, conform to 

the air planning goals in the applicable 

SIP. The requirement to determine 

conformity applies to transportation 

plans, programs, and projects 

developed, funded, or approved under 

Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit 

Act (transportation conformity) as well 

as to all other federally-supported or 

funded projects (general conformity). 

State conformity SIP revisions must be 

consistent with Federal conformity 

regulations that the CAA required the 

EPA to promulgate. 

In addition to the fact that part D 

requirements did not become due prior 

to Indiana’s submission of the complete 

ozone redesignation request for LaPorte 

County, and, therefore, are not 

applicable for redesignation purposes, 

EPA similarly believes that it is 

reasonable to interpret the conformity 

requirements as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating the ozone 

redesignation request under section 

107(d) of the CAA. In addition, please 

note that it is reasonable to interpret the 

conformity requirements as not 

applying for purposes of evaluating the 

ozone redesignation request under 

section 107(d) of the CAA because state 

conformity rules are still required after 

redesignation of an area to attainment of 

a NAAQS and Federal conformity rules 

apply where state rules have not been 

approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 

426 (6th Cir. 2001). See also 60 FR 

62748 (December 7, 1995) (Tampa, 

Florida). 

Part D, subpart 2 requirements: 

Similar to the subpart 1 requirements, 

EPA believes that the subpart 2 

requirements that apply to LaPorte 

County do not apply to a consideration 

of Indiana’s ozone redesignation request 

because the State submitted a complete 

ozone redesignation request for LaPorte 

County before any of the applicable 

subpart 2 requirements became due. 

The May 10, 1995 Seitz memorandum 

(see ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, May 10, 1995) states that 

certain SIP revisions need not be 

submitted for EPA to approve a 

redesignation request since the 

requirements would no longer be 

considered applicable requirements as 

long as the area continues to attain the 

standard. As set forth in this policy, 

EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret 

the provisions regarding RFP and 

attainment demonstrations, along with 

certain other related provisions, as not 

requiring further state submissions to 

achieve attainment if an area is in fact 

attaining the standard. In the May 10, 

1995 memorandum, EPA articulated in 

detail its interpretation that certain 

requirements of subparts 1 and 2 are not 

applicable once an area has attained the 

standard, for as long as it continues to 

do so. 

The United States Court of Appeals 

for the Tenth Circuit has upheld this 

interpretation, Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 

F.3d 1551 (10th Cir. 1996), as has the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh 

Circuit. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 

537 (7th Cir. 2004). In addition, EPA has 

explained in rulemaking actions on the 

1-hour ozone standard its rationale for 

the reasonableness of this interpretation 

of the CAA. See: 67 FR 49600 (July 31, 

2002); 65 FR 37879 (June 19, 2000); 65 

FR 3630, 3631–32 (January 24, 2000) 

(Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio, Kentucky); 

61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996) (ClevelandAkron-Lorain, Ohio); 66 FR 53094 

(October 19, 2001) (Pittsburgh-Beaver 

Valley, Pennsylvania); 60 FR 37366 

(July 20, 1995); 61 FR 31832–33 (June 

21, 1996) (Grand Rapids, Michigan); 60 

FR 36723 (July 18, 1995) (Salt Lake and 

Davis Counties, Utah); 68 FR 4847, 

4848, 4851, 4855 (January 30, 2003); 68 

FR 25418 (May 12, 2003) (St. Louis, 

Missouri); and, 66 FR 27484, 27486 

(May 17, 2001) (Louisville, Kentucky). 

EPA has also determined that areas 

being redesignated need not comply 

with the requirement that a New Source 

Review (NSR) program be approved 

prior to redesignation, provided that the 

area demonstrates maintenance of the 

standard without part D NSR, since 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) requirements will apply after 

redesignation. A more detailed rationale 

for this view is described in a 

memorandum from Mary Nichols, 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ Indiana 

has demonstrated that LaPorte County 

will be able to maintain the 8-hour 

ozone standard without part D NSR in 

effect, and, therefore, we conclude that 

the State need not have a fully approved 

part D NSR program prior to approval of 

the redesignation request. The State’s 

PSD program will become effective in 

LaPorte County upon redesignation to 

attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, 

Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468, March 7, 

1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio 

(61 FR 20458, 20469–20470, May 7, 

1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 

53665, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, 

Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837, June 21, 

1996). 

We conclude that the State and 

LaPorte County have satisfied all 

applicable requirements under section 

110 and part D of the CAA to the extent 

that the requirements apply for the 

purposes of reviewing the State’s ozone 

redesignation request. 

b. LaPorte County Has a Fully Approved 

Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of 

the CAA 

EPA has fully approved the Indiana 

SIP for LaPorte County under section 

110(k) of the CAA for all applicable 

requirements. EPA may rely on prior 

SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request (See the 

September 4, 1992 John Calcagni 

memorandum, page 3, Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th 

Cir. 1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 

(6th Cir. 2001)), plus any additional 

measures it may approve in conjunction 

with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 

25426 (May 12, 2003). Since the passage 

of the CAA of 1970, Indiana has adopted 

and submitted, and EPA has fully 

approved, provisions addressing the 

various required SIP elements 

applicable to LaPorte County for 

purposes of redesignation. No LaPorte 

County SIP provisions are currently 

disapproved, conditionally approved, or 

partially approved. As indicated above, 

EPA believes that the section 110 

elements not connected with 

nonattainment plan submissions and 

not linked to the area’s nonattainment 

status are not applicable requirements 

for purposes of review of the State’s 

redesignation request. EPA has 

concluded that the section 110 SIP 

submission approved under the 1-hour 

ozone standard will be adequate for 

purposes of attaining and maintaining 

the 8-hour standard. EPA also believes 

that since the part D requirements did 

not become due prior to Indiana’s 

submission of a final, complete 

redesignation request, they also are not 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. 

3. The Air Quality Improvement in 

LaPorte County Is Due To Permanent 

and Enforceable Reductions in 

Emissions From Implementation of the 

SIP and Applicable Federal Air 

Pollution Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Emission 

Reductions 

EPA believes that the State of Indiana 

has demonstrated that the observed air 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19430 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

quality improvement in LaPorte County 

is due to permanent and enforceable 

emission reductions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, Federal 

measures, and other State-adopted 

measures. 

The State has documented the 

changes in VOC and NOX emissions 

from anthropogenic (man-made or manbased) sources in LaPorte County 

between 1996 and 2004 and the changes 

in NOX emissions from Electric 

Generating Units (EGUs) in Northwest 

Indiana (Jasper, Lake, LaPorte, and 

Porter Counties) and statewide between 

1999 and 2005. LaPorte County was 

monitored in violation of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS during the period of 

1996 through 1999 and monitored in 

attainment with the NAAQS during the 

period of 2003 through 2005. The VOC 

and NOX emissions for LaPorte County 

for various years during the period of 

1996 through 2004 are given in Table 2. 

TABLE 2.—VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS TRENDS IN LAPORTE COUNTY FOR ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES

[Emissions in tons/summer day] 

Pollutant 1996 1999 2002 2004 

VOC ................................................................................................................................. 31.0 29.7 24.5 24.0 

NOX .................................................................................................................................. 83.7 45.4 71.6 44.4 

The NOX emissions trends for EGUs 

in Northwest Indiana and statewide for 

Table 3. The NOX emissions for LaPorte 

County and the EGU NOX emissions 

from Northwest Indiana and statewide 

have shown significant downward 

trends from 1996 and 1999, 8-hour 

standard violation years, to 2004 and 

2005, attainment years (and from 2002, 

a violation year, to 2004, an attainment 

year). IDEM notes that the NOX

emissions in Northwest Indiana and 

statewide declined significantly as a 

result of the implementation of the 

Indiana NOX SIP (in response to EPA’s 

NOX SIP call) and acid rain control 

regulations, both of which led to 

permanent, enforceable emission 

reductions. 

TABLE 3.—NOX EMISSION TRENDS FOR ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS IN NORTHWEST AND INDIANA STATEWIDE

[Emissions in thousands of tons per ozone season (April–September)] 

Area 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Northwest Indiana .......................................................................................................... 31.8 25.0 27.4 22.7 18.0 11.8 10.6 

Statewide ....................................................................................................................... 149.8 133.9 136.1 114.0 99.3 66.6 55.5 

As noted in Table 2, the total VOC 

emissions in LaPorte County also 

declined between 1996 and 2004. IDEM 

notes that this emissions decline has 

resulted despite an increase in point 

source VOC emissions in this County 

due to source growth. VOC emission 

control measures have been 

implemented in LaPorte County 

constraining the impacts of new source 

growth in this County. The State’s VOC 

rules were adopted in the mid-1990s, 

and include the following VOC control 

rules: 326 Indiana Administrative Code 

(IAC) 8–1–6 (Best Available Control 

Technology (BACT) for non-specific 

sources); 326 IAC 8–2 (surface coating 

emission limitations); 326 IAC (organic 

solvent degreasing operations); 326 IAC 

8–4 (petroleum sources, including 

storage, transport, and marketing 

sources and petroleum refining); 326 

IAC 8–5 (miscellaneous sources); and 

326 IAC 8–6 (organic solvent emission 

limitations). These VOC control rules 

have been implemented statewide. 

Compliance with these rules has 

resulted in a decrease in point source 

VOC emissions in LaPorte County, 

offsetting some source growth, as well 

as decreasing VOC emissions in the 

remainder of Northwest Indiana and 

statewide. The VOC emission 

reductions resulting from the 

implementation of the VOC emission 

control rules are permanent and 

enforceable. 

Since LaPorte County was not 

previously designated as a 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area, no ozone precursor 

emission controls were specifically 

targeted at this County. Therefore, 

statewide and Federal emission control 

requirements have provided the 

majority of the VOC and NOX emission 

reductions in LaPorte County and in the 

surrounding area. 

Besides the statewide VOC RACT 

rules and NOX emission control 

requirements, other Federal emission 

reduction requirements have resulted in 

decreased ozone precursor emissions in 

the Northwest Indiana area and/or will 

produce future emission reductions that 

will support maintenance of the ozone 

standard in LaPorte County (see a more 

detailed discussion on maintenance of 

the 8-hour ozone standard in LaPorte 

County below). These emission 

reduction requirements include the 

following: 

Tier 2 Emission Standards for 

Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards. 

These emission control requirements 

result in lower emissions from new cars 

and light duty trucks, including sport 

utility vehicles. The Federal rules are 

being phased in between 2004 and 2009. 

The EPA has estimated that, by the end 

of the phase-in period, the following 

vehicle NOX emission reductions will 

occur nation-wide: passenger cars (light 

duty vehicles) (77 percent); light duty 

trucks, minivans, and sports utility 

vehicles (86 percent; and larger sports 

utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks 

(69 to 95 percent). VOC emission 

reductions are also expected to range 

from 12 to 18 percent, depending on 

vehicle class, over the same period. 

Although some of these emission 

reductions have already occurred by the 

2004 attainment year, most of these 

emission reductions will occur during 

the maintenance period for LaPorte 

County. 

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines. In July 

2000, EPA issued a final rule to control 

the emissions from highway heavy duty 

diesel engines, including low-sulfur 

diesel fuel standards. These emission 

reductions are being phased in between 

2004 and 2007. This rule is expected to 

result in a 40 percent decrease in NOX

emissions from heavy duty diesel 

vehicles. 

Non-Road Diesel Rule. Issued in May 

2004, this rule generally applies to new 

stationary diesel engines used in certain 

industries, including construction, 

agriculture, and mining. In addition to 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19431 

4The attainment year can be any of the three 

consecutive years in which the area has clean 

(below violation level) air quality data (2003, 2004, 

or 2005 for LaPorte County). 

affecting engine design, this rule 

includes requirements for cleaner fuels. 

It is expected to reduce NOX emissions 

from these engines by up to 90 percent, 

and to significantly reduce particulate 

matter and sulfur emissions from these 

engines in addition to the NOX emission 

reduction. This rule did not affect 2004 

emissions from these sources, but will 

limit emissions from new engines 

beginning in 2008. 

Indiana commits to maintain all 

existing emission control measures that 

affect LaPorte County after this area is 

redesignated to attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. All changes in existing 

rules affecting LaPorte County and new 

rules subsequently needed to provide 

for the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in LaPorte County will be 

submitted to the EPA for approval as 

SIP revisions. 

4. LaPorte County Has a Fully 

Approvable Ozone Maintenance Plan 

Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA 

In conjunction with its request to 

redesignate LaPorte County to 

attainment of the ozone NAAQS, 

Indiana submitted a SIP revision request 

to provide for maintenance of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in LaPorte County for at 

least 10 years after the redesignation of 

this area to attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

a. What Is Required in an Ozone 

Maintenance Plan? 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the required elements of air quality 

maintenance plans for areas seeking 

redesignation from nonattainment to 

attainment of a NAAQS. Under section 

175A, a maintenance plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the Administrator approves 

the redesignation to attainment. Eight 

years after the redesignation, the State 

must submit a revised maintenance plan 

which demonstrates maintenance of the 

standard for 10 years following the 

initial 10-year maintenance period. To 

address the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must 

contain such contingency measures, 

with a schedule for implementation, as 

EPA deems necessary, to assure prompt 

correction of any future NAAQS 

violations. The September 4, 1992 John 

Calcagni memorandum provides 

additional guidance on the content of 

maintenance plans. An ozone 

maintenance plan should, at minimum, 

address the following items: (1) The 

attainment VOC and NOX emissions 

inventories; (2) a maintenance 

demonstration showing maintenance for 

the 10 years of the maintenance period; 

(3) a commitment to maintain the 

existing monitoring network; (4) factors 

and procedures to be used for 

verification of continued attainment; 

and, (5) a contingency plan to prevent 

and/or correct a future violation of the 

NAAQS. 

b. What Are the Attainment Emission 

Inventories for LaPorte County? 

IDEM prepared comprehensive VOC 

and NOX emission inventories for 

LaPorte County, including point 

(significant stationary sources), area 

(smaller and widely-distributed 

stationary sources), mobile on-road, and 

mobile non-road sources for 2004 (the 

base year/attainment year). To develop 

the attainment year emission 

inventories, IDEM used the following 

approaches and sources of data: 

Area Sources—Area source VOC and 

NOX emissions were projected from 

Indiana’s 2002 periodic emissions 

inventory, which was previously 

submitted to the EPA. 

Mobile On-Road Sources—Mobile 

source emissions were calculated using 

the MOBILE6 emission factor model and 

traffic data (vehicle miles traveled, 

vehicle speeds, and vehicle type and age 

distributions) extracted from the 

region’s travel-demand model. IDEM 

has provided detailed data summaries to 

document the calculation of mobile onroad VOC and NOX emissions for 2004, 

as well as for the projection years of 

2010 and 2020 (further discussed 

below). 

Point Source Emissions—2004 point 

source emissions were compiled using 

IDEM’s 2004 annual emissions 

statement database and the 2005 EPA 

Air Markets acid rain emissions 

inventory database. 

Mobile Non-Road Emissions—Nonroad mobile source emissions were 

estimated by the EPA and documented 

in the 2002 National Emissions 

Inventory (NEI). IDEM used these 

emissions estimates along with growth 

factors to grow the non-road mobile 

source emissions to 2004. To address 

concerns about the accuracy of some of 

the emissions for various source 

categories in EPA’s non-road emissions 

model, the Lake Michigan Air Directors 

Consortium (LADCO) contracted with 

several companies to review the base 

data used by the EPA and to make 

recommendations for corrections to the 

model. Emissions were estimated for 

commercial marine vessels and 

railroads. Recreational motorboat 

population and spatial surrogates (used 

to assign emissions to each county) were 

updated. The populations for the 

construction equipment category were 

reviewed and updated based on surveys 

completed in the Midwest, and the 

temporal allocation for agricultural 

sources was also updated. Based on 

these and other updates, the EPA 

provided a revised non-road estimation 

model, which was used for the 2004 

projected non-road mobile source 

emissions. 

The 2004 attainment year VOC and 

NOX emissions for LaPorte County are 

summarized along with the 2010 and 

2020 projected emissions for this 

County in Tables 4 and 5 below. They 

confirm that the State has acceptably 

derived and documented the attainment 

year VOC and NOX emissions for 

LaPorte County. 

c. Demonstration of Maintenance 

As part of the May 30, 2006 

redesignation request submittal, IDEM 

included a requested revision to the SIP 

to incorporate a 10-year ozone 

maintenance plan as required under 

section 175A of the CAA. The 

maintenance plan contains a 

maintenance demonstration. This 

demonstration shows maintenance of 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by 

documenting current and projected VOC 

and NOX emissions and showing that 

future emissions of VOC and NOX

remain at or below the attainment year 

emission levels.4 Note that a 

maintenance demonstration need not be 

based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 

265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club 

v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See 

also 66 FR 53094, 53099–53100 

(October 19, 2001) and 68 FR 25430–

25432 (May 12, 2003). 

Table 4 specifies the VOC emissions 

in LaPorte County for 2004, 2010, and 

2020. IDEM chose 2020 as a projection 

year to meet the 10-year maintenance 

projection requirement, allowing several 

years for the State to complete its 

adoption of the ozone redesignation 

request and ozone maintenance plan 

and for the EPA to approve the 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan. IDEM also chose 2010 as an 

interim year to demonstrate that VOC 

and NOX emissions will remain below 

the attainment levels throughout the 10- 

year maintenance period. 

Table 5, similar to Table 4, specifies 

the NOX emissions in LaPorte County 

for 2004, 2010, and 2020. Together, 

Tables 4 and 5 demonstrate that LaPorte 

County should remain in attainment of 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS between 2004 

and 2020, for more than 10 years after 

EPA is expected to approve the 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19432 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

redesignation of LaPorte County to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

TABLE 4.—ATTAINMENT YEAR (2004) AND PROJECTED VOC EMISSIONS IN LAPORTE COUNTY

[Tons per summer day] 

Source sector 

Year 

2004 2010 2020 

Point ......................................................................................................................................................... 4.36 3.61 3.53 

Area ......................................................................................................................................................... 7.17 7.51 8.14 

On-Road Mobile ....................................................................................................................................... 7.36 4.75 3.09 

Off-Road Mobile ....................................................................................................................................... 5.13 3.93 3.23 

Total .................................................................................................................................................. 24.02 19.80 17.99 

TABLE 5.—ATTAINMENT YEAR AND PROJECTED NOX EMISSIONS IN LAPORTE COUNTY

[Tons per summer day] 

Source sector 

Year 

2004 2010 2020 

Point ......................................................................................................................................................... 4.80 4.15 3.63 

Area ......................................................................................................................................................... 1.13 1.20 1.26 

On-Road Mobile ....................................................................................................................................... 28.52 17.15 5.91 

Off-road Mobile ........................................................................................................................................ 9.96 7.57 6.41 

Total .................................................................................................................................................. 44.41 30.07 17.21 

IDEM also notes that the State’s EGU 

NOX emission control rules stemming 

from EPA’s NOX SIP call, implemented 

beginning in 2004, and CAIR will 

further lower NOX emissions in upwind 

areas, resulting in decreased ozone and 

ozone precursor transport into LaPorte 

County (the State did not project the 

emission decreases resulting from CAIR 

and did not document future NOX

emissions in upwind Counties). This 

will also support maintenance of the 

ozone standard in LaPorte County. 

The emission projections for LaPorte 

County coupled with the expected 

impacts of the State’s EGU NOX rules 

and CAIR lead to the conclusion that 

LaPorte County should maintain the 8- 

hour ozone standard throughout the 10- 

year maintenance period. The decrease 

in local VOC and local and regional 

NOX emissions indicate that peak ozone 

levels in LaPorte County may actually 

further decline during the 10-year ozone 

maintenance period. 

IDEM has documented some of the 

procedures used to project emissions. 

On-road mobile sources were projected 

using the MOBILE6 emission factor 

model and projected traffic data 

obtained from the Northwest Indiana 

Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC), 

who maintains a travel demand forecast 

model that is capable of projecting 

changes in total daily Vehicle Miles 

Traveled (VMT). Emissions for the other 

major source sectors were determined 

using projected source activity/growth 

data provided by LADCO, as well as 

major source emissions data obtained 

periodically for all major sources 

statewide. IDEM’s data demonstrate that 

emissions projections for LaPorte 

County are consistent with the planning 

analyses being conducted to attain the 

8-hour ozone and fine particle (PM2.5) 

standards throughout Indiana and 

throughout the Lake Michigan area. 

Based on the comparison of the 

projected emissions and the attainment 

year emissions, we conclude that IDEM 

has successfully demonstrated that the 

8-hour ozone standard should be 

maintained in LaPorte County. We 

believe that this is especially likely 

given the expected impacts of the NOX

SIP call and CAIR. As noted by IDEM, 

this conclusion is further supported by 

the fact that other states in the eastern 

portion of the United States are 

expected to further reduce regional NOX

emissions through implementation of 

their own NOX emission control rules 

for EGUs and other NOX sources and 

through implementation of CAIR, 

reducing ozone and NOX transport into 

LaPorte County. 

d. Monitoring Network 

IDEM commits to continue operating 

and maintaining an approved ozone 

monitoring network in LaPorte County 

in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 

through the 10-year maintenance 

period. This will allow the confirmation 

of the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 

standard in this area and the triggering 

of contingency measures if needed. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Continued attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in LaPorte County 

depends on the State’s efforts toward 

tracking applicable indicators during 

the maintenance period. The State’s 

plan for verifying continued attainment 

of the 8-hour ozone standard in LaPorte 

County consists, in part, of a plan to 

continue ambient ozone monitoring in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR part 58. In addition, IDEM will 

periodically revise and review the VOC 

and NOX emissions inventories for 

LaPorte County to assure that emissions 

growth is not threatening the continued 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard 

in this area. Revised emission 

inventories for this area will be 

prepared for 2005, 2008, and 2011 as 

necessary to comply with the emission 

inventory reporting requirements 

established in the CAA. The revised 

emissions will be compared with the 

2004 attainment emissions and the 2020 

projected maintenance year emissions to 

assure continued maintenance of the 

ozone standard. 

f. Contingency Plan 

The contingency plan provisions of 

the CAA are designed to result in 

prompt correction or prevention of 

violations of the NAAQS that might 

occur after redesignation of an area to 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19433 

attainment of the NAAQS. Section 175A 

of the CAA requires that a maintenance 

plan include such contingency 

measures as EPA deems necessary to 

assure that the State will promptly 

correct a violation of the NAAQS that 

might occur after redesignation. The 

maintenance plan must identify the 

contingency measures to be considered 

for possible adoption, a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation of the selected 

contingency measures, and a time limit 

for action by the State. The State should 

also identify specific indicators to be 

used to determine when the 

contingency measures need to be 

adopted and implemented. The 

maintenance plan must include a 

requirement that the State will 

implement all measures with respect to 

control of the pollutant(s) that were 

controlled in the SIP before the 

redesignation of the area to attainment. 

See section 175A(d) of the CAA. 

As required by section 175A of the 

CAA, Indiana has adopted a 

contingency plan to address a possible 

future ozone air quality problem. The 

contingency plan has two levels of 

actions/responses depending on 

whether a violation of the 8-hour ozone 

standard is only threatened (Warning 

Level Response) or has actually 

occurred (Action Level Response). 

A Warning Level Response will be 

prompted whenever an annual (1-year) 

fourth-high monitored daily peak 8-hour 

ozone concentration of 89 ppb (or 

greater) occurs at any monitor in 

LaPorte County, or a 2-year averaged 

annual fourth-high daily peak 8-hour 

ozone concentration of 85 ppb or greater 

occurs at any monitor in LaPorte 

County. A Warning Level Response will 

consist of a study to determine whether 

the monitored ozone level indicates a 

trend toward higher ozone levels or 

whether emissions are increasing, 

threatening a future violation of the 

ozone NAAQS. The study will evaluate 

whether the trend, if any, is likely to 

continue, and, if so, emission control 

measures necessary to reverse the trend 

will be adopted, taking into 

consideration the ease and timing of 

implementation, as well as economic 

and social considerations. 

Implementation of necessary controls 

will take place as expeditiously as 

possible, but in no event later than 12 

months from the conclusion of the most 

recent ozone season. If new emission 

controls are needed to reverse the 

adverse ozone trend, the procedures for 

emission control selection under the 

Action Level Response will be followed. 

An Action Level Response will be 

triggered when a violation of the 8-hour 

ozone standard is monitored at any of 

the monitors in LaPorte County (when 

a 3-year average annual fourth-high 

monitored daily peak 8-hour ozone 

concentration of 85 ppb or higher is 

recorded at any monitor in LaPorte 

County). In this situation, IDEM will 

determine the additional emission 

control measures needed to assure 

future attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. IDEM will focus on emission 

control measures that can be 

implemented within 18 months from 

the close of the ozone season in which 

the ozone standard violation is 

monitored. 

Adoption of any additional emission 

control measures prompted by either of 

the two response levels will be subject 

to the necessary administrative and 

legal processes dictated by State law. 

This process will include publication of 

public notices, providing the 

opportunity for a public hearing, and 

other measures required by Indiana law 

for rulemaking by State environmental 

boards. If a new emission control 

measure is already promulgated and 

scheduled for implementation at the 

Federal or State level, and that emission 

control measure is determined to be 

sufficient to address the air quality 

problem or adverse trend, additional 

local emission control measures may be 

determined to be unnecessary. IDEM 

will submit to the EPA an analysis to 

demonstrate that the proposed emission 

control measures or existing emission 

control measures are adequate to 

provide for future attainment of the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS in LaPorte County. 

Contingency measures contained in 

the maintenance plan are those 

emission controls or other measures that 

the State may choose to adopt and 

implement to correct existing or 

possible air quality problems in LaPorte 

County. These include, but are not 

limited to, the following: 

i. Lower Reid vapor pressure gasoline 

requirements; 

ii. Broader geographic applicability of 

existing emission control measures; 

iii. Tightened RACT requirements on 

existing sources covered by EPA Control 

Technique Guidelines (CTGs) issued in 

response to the 1999 CAA amendments; 

iv. Application of RACT to smaller 

existing sources; 

v. Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance (I/M); 

vi. One or more Transportation 

Control Measure (TCM) sufficient to 

achieve at least a 0.5 percent reduction 

in actual area-wide VOC emissions, to 

be selected from the following: 

A. Trip reduction programs, 

including, but not limited to, employerbased transportation management plans, 

area-wide rideshare programs, work 

schedule programs, and telecommuting; 

B. Transit improvement; 

C. Traffic flow improvements; and, 

D. Other new or innovative 

transportation measures not yet in 

widespread use that affect State and 

local governments as deemed 

appropriate; 

vii. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit 

programs for fleet vehicle operations; 

viii. Controls on consumer products 

consistent with those adopted elsewhere 

in the United States; 

ix. VOC or NOX emission offsets for 

new or modified major sources; 

x. VOC or NOX emission offsets for 

new or modified minor sources; 

xi. Increased ratio of emission offset 

required for new sources; and, 

xii. VOC or NOX emission controls on 

new minor sources (with VOC or NOX

emissions less than 100 tons per year). 

g. Provisions for a Future Update of the 

Ozone Maintenance Plan 

As required by section 175A(b) of the 

CAA, the State commits to submit to the 

EPA an update of the ozone 

maintenance plan eight years after 

redesignation of LaPorte County to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

The updated maintenance plan will 

provide for maintenance of the 8-hour 

ozone standard in LaPorte County for an 

additional 10 years beyond the period 

covered by the initial ozone 

maintenance plan. 

V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for 

the End of the 10-Year Maintenance 

Plan Which Can Be Used To Support 

Conformity Determinations? 

A. How Are the Motor Vehicle Emission 

Budgets Developed and What Are the 

Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for 

LaPorte County? 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, SIP revisions 

and ozone maintenance plans for 

applicable areas (for ozone 

nonattainment areas and for areas 

seeking redesignations to attainment of 

the ozone standard or revising existing 

ozone maintenance plans). These 

emission control SIP revisions (e.g., 

reasonable further progress and 

attainment demonstration SIP 

revisions), including ozone maintenance 

plans, must create MVEBs based on onroad mobile source emissions allocated 

to highway and transit vehicle use that, 

together with emissions from other 

sources in the area, will provide for 

attainment or maintenance of the ozone 

NAAQS. 

Under 40 CFR part 93, MVEBs for an 

area seeking a redesignation to 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19434 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

attainment of the NAAQS are 

established for the last year of the 

maintenance plan. The MVEBs serve as 

ceilings on emissions from an area’s 

planned transportation system. The 

MVEB concept is further explained in 

the preamble to the November 24, 1993 

transportation conformity rule (58 FR 

62188). The preamble also describes 

how to establish the MVEBs in the SIP 

and how to revise the MVEBs if needed. 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation projects, such as the 

construction of new highways, must 

‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with) 

the part of the SIP that addresses 

emissions from cars and trucks. 

Conformity to the SIP means that 

transportation activities will not cause 

new air quality standard violations, or 

delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. 

If a transportation plan does not 

conform, most new transportation 

projects that would expand the capacity 

of roadways cannot go forward. 

Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth 

EPA’s policy, criteria, and procedures 

for demonstrating and assuring 

conformity of transportation activities to 

a SIP. 

When reviewing SIP revisions 

containing MVEBs, including 

attainment strategies, rate-of-progress 

plans, and maintenance plans, EPA 

must affirmatively find that the MVEBs 

are ‘‘adequate’’ for use in determining 

transportation conformity. Once EPA 

affirmatively finds the submitted 

MVEBs to be adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes, the MVEBs are 

used by state and Federal agencies in 

determining whether proposed 

transportation projects conform to the 

SIPs as required by section 176(c) of the 

CAA. EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining the adequacy of MVEBs are 

specified in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). 

EPA’s process for determining 

adequacy of MVEBs consists of three 

basic steps: (1) Providing public 

notification of a SIP submission; (2) 

providing the public the opportunity to 

comment on the MVEBs during a public 

comment period; and, (3) making a 

finding of adequacy. The process of 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in 

EPA’s May 14, 1999 guidance, 

‘‘Conformity Guidance on 

Implementation of March 2, 1999, 

Conformity Court Decision.’’ This 

guidance was finalized in the 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 

Revisions for Existing Areas: 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments—Response to Court 

Decision and Additional Rule Change’’

published on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 

40004). EPA follows this guidance and 

rulemaking in making its adequacy 

determinations. 

The Transportation Conformity Rule, 

in 40 CFR 93.118(f), provides for MVEB 

adequacy findings through two 

mechanisms. First, section 93.118(f)(1) 

provides for posting a notice to the EPA 

conformity Web site at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/adequacy.htm and providing 

a 30-day public comment period. 

Second, a mechanism is described in 40 

CFR 93.118(f)(2) which provides that 

EPA can review the adequacy of an 

implementation plan MVEB 

simultaneously with its review of the 

implementation plan itself. 

The LaPorte County 10-year 

maintenance plan contains VOC and 

NOX MVEBs for 2020. EPA has 

reviewed the submittal and the 

proposed VOC and NOX MVEBs for 

LaPorte County and finds that the 

MVEBs meet the adequacy criteria in 

the Transportation Conformity Rule. 

Any and all comments on the 

approvability of the MVEBs should be 

submitted during the comment period 

stated in the DATES section of this 

notice. 

EPA, through this rulemaking, is 

proposing to approve the MVEBs for use 

to determine transportation conformity 

in LaPorte County because EPA has 

determined that the budgets are 

consistent with the control measures in 

the SIP and that LaPorte County can 

maintain attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the relevant required 10- 

year period with mobile source 

emissions at the levels of the MVEBs. 

IDEM has determined the 2020 MVEBs 

for LaPorte County to be 3.40 tons per 

day for VOC and 6.50 tons per day for 

NOX. It should be noted that these 

MVEBs exceed the on-road mobile 

source VOC and NOX emissions 

projected by IDEM for 2020, as 

summarized in Tables 4 and 5 above 

(‘‘On-Road Mobile’’ source sector). 

Through discussions with all 

organizations involved in transportation 

planning for LaPorte County, IDEM 

decided to include safety margins of 

0.31 tons per day for VOC and 0.59 tons 

per day for NOX in the MVEBs to 

provide for mobile source growth not 

anticipated in the projected 2020 

emissions. Indiana has demonstrated 

that LaPorte County can maintain the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS with mobile source 

emissions of 3.40 tons per day of VOC 

and 6.50 tons per day of NOX in 2020 

since total source emissions with the 

increased mobile source emissions will 

remain under the attainment year levels. 

B. What Is a Safety Margin? 

A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference 

between the attainment level of 

emissions (from all sources) and the 

projected level of emissions (from all 

sources) in the maintenance plan. As 

noted in Tables 4 and 5, LaPorte County 

emissions are projected to have safety 

margins of 7.03 tons per day for VOC 

and 37.20 tons per day for NOX in 2020, 

the difference between the 2004, 

attainment year, and 2020 VOC and 

NOX emissions for all sources in LaPorte 

County. 

The MVEBs requested by IDEM 

contain mobile source safety margins 

(selected by the State) significantly 

smaller than the safety margins reflected 

in the total emissions for LaPorte 

County. The State is not requesting 

allocation of the entire available safety 

margins actually reflected in the 

demonstration of maintenance (in 

Tables 4 and 5). Therefore, even though 

the State is requesting MVEBs that 

exceed the on-road mobile source 

emissions for 2020 contained in the 

demonstration of maintenance, the 

increase in on-road mobile source 

emissions that can be considered for 

transportation conformity purposes is 

well within the safety margins of the 

ozone maintenance demonstration. 

C. Are the MVEBs Approvable? 

The VOC and NOX MVEBs for LaPorte 

County are approvable because they 

maintain the total emissions for LaPorte 

County at or below the attainment year 

emission inventory levels, as required 

by the transportation conformity 

regulations. 

VI. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed 

Action? 

Approval of the redesignation request 

would change the official designation of 

LaPorte County for the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81, from 

nonattainment to attainment. It would 

also incorporate into the Indiana SIP a 

plan for maintaining the ozone NAAQS 

through 2020. The maintenance plan 

includes contingency measures to 

remedy possible future violations of the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, and establishes 

MVEBs of 3.40 tons per day for VOC 

and 6.50 tons per day for NOX. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, September 30, 1993), this action 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

and, therefore, is not subject to review 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19435 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed action merely proposes 

to approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule proposes to approve 

pre-existing requirements under state 

law and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by state law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

states, on the relationship between the 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

proposes to approve a state rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed rule also does not have 

tribal implications because it will not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This proposed rule also is not subject 

to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

Because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action,’’ this action is also not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, 

requires Federal agencies to use 

technical standards that are developed 

or adopted by voluntary consensus to 

carry out policy objectives, so long as 

such standards are not inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Absent a prior 

existing requirement for the state to use 

voluntary consensus standards, EPA has 

no authority to disapprove a SIP 

submission for failure to use such 

standards, and it would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in place of a program 

submission that otherwise satisfies the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act. 

Therefore, the requirements of section 

12(d) of the NTTAA do not apply. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, Environmental 

protection, National parks, Wilderness 

areas. 

Dated: April 6, 2007. 

Walter W. Kovalick, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. E7–7348 Filed 4–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–1022; FRL–8301–7] 

Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of 

the Youngstown Area to Attainment of 

the 8-Hour Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On February 15, 2007, the 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 

(Ohio EPA), submitted a request for a 

redesignation of its portion of the 

Youngstown area to attainment of the 8- 

hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS), and a 

request for EPA approval of an ozone 

maintenance plan for Mahoning, 

Trumbull, and Columbiana Counties, 

Ohio. The State public hearing on the 

submittal was held on January 9, 2007. 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Youngstown area has attained the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that 

the State’s ozone maintenance plan for 

the area is acceptable and, in 

conjunction with projected emissions in 

the Pennsylvania portion of the area 

(Mercer County), will provide for 

maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in these Counties through 2018. 

EPA is proposing approval of the State’s 

request to redesignate Mahoning, 

Trumbull, and Columbiana Counties, 

Ohio to attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides 

(NOX) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

(MVEBs) for Mahoning, Trumbull, and 

Columbiana Counties, Ohio for 

purposes of transportation conformity 

determinations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 18, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–

OAR–2006–1022, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

• Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS